the fall of Murdoch gives rise to hope

Post Reply New Topic

The left just wants Murdock gone because he's single-handedly destroyed their "news" media monopoly. Kinda interesting that they go after Murdoch yet are completely ignoring George Soros.

Metaphorically speaking, it all depends on whose sacred cow is getting gored.

Strangely enough, this world seems to need the Rupert Murdocks to balance out the George Soroses, and vice-versa.

Who ever said I wanted to force people to stop getting their news from Murdoch? I meant I would like to persuade people to turn their backs on him.
And I sincerely doubt this is just about a couple disgruntled employees, as this is exponentially getting bigger and bigger.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Considering he closed down one Newspaper over it, I don't think he was in on what was going on.

Also, hate to break it to you, but you aren't going to convince a lot of people, because quite frankly the other media outlets have shown they have no ethical standards when it comes to telling the truth.

And Murdoch and his minions have any scruples? I actually put much more faith in CNN and MSNBC, as I don't see them bending the truth to fit a certain political philosophy, and they certainly haven't demonized certain Americans because of their religion or ethnicity. Fox and Murdoch's other news outlets certainly have.
As for Murdoch not having anything to do with these scandals - possibly. But he most certainly had created a culture of deceit and dirty dealing in order to score headlines.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Its one of those domino effect things just getting started expecailly if he is taken to court and convicted.

As far as his media is the most credible....If you believe that, I have ocean front property in Oklahoma to sell you.

I dislike RM and what he represents; thats my opinion and I'm keeping it as far as I'm concerned. Theres a difference between taking wealth seriously, and putting money above human life and happiness.
I don't hate the rich. I dislike greedy media giants who try to force their agendas down our throats instead of helping us think for ourselves. RM has turned alot of britons into sheep who just follow what the tabloids say. The problem is most people are too damn stupid to know what RM is doing to humanity and to the less fortunate of this world!

Also, by saying we would be nowhere without the rich, you're basically implying that poor people are ignorant, stupid and not worth anything. You're insulting everybody who doesn't have a high income. But I am a decent kindhearted person and I do have some level of intelligence! Poor, Rich, Black, White, Straight, Gay, We are all the same and we've all contributed something towards humanity at one point.

Fnord, if you support Murdoch and his empire then thats fine.

I just dislike greedy snobs who treat the poor like scum just because they are richer than they are. You know how bad the north-south devide is in the UK at the moment? I couldn't become rich if I tried because honestly there are no decent jobs out there for regular working class folks like myself. I think money is dangerous because it turns people. It REALLY does. I just wish people were more sensible and didn't buy into the racist, homophobic, classist and nazi crap RM and his empire puts out on a regular basis. If you need "evidence" for that, try watching fox news.

Ok... Rant over.

The Sun and News of the World? The only critical voices in the UK? That's one of the funniest things I think I've ever read on this site.

I bolded the other funny. It's not really worth the effort though. Inuyasha's at about an Operating Thetan Level VIII on the batsh*t scale of Foxentology.

Are you wishfully thinking or thinking wishfully ?

ruveyn

I read on verizon moble news today that many investors are pulling out of alot of Murdoch's media, not just the tabloids either, so we will just have to see how this plays out.

Well let's start with your most reasonable claim: that this may be only one or two disreputable employees. Well, I would have given you the benefit of the doubt on that a few months ago when these allegations were confined to The News of the World. But that is simply no longer the case. The allegations have spread to The Sun and possibly to The Sunday Times. Furthermore, the allegations of bribery will necessitate tracing the money trail. A reporter handing an envelope stuffed with fivers to a member of the Royal Protection Squad is going to be claiming that back on expenses. How were those expenses described and who authorized their payment?

I have no idea whether there is any truth on the allegations of US News Corp. outlets hacking into phones after 9/11, but if anything comes from the FBI investigation you can be sure that "America's Most Trusted News Source" will be transformed into "America's Pariah" in a matter of milliseconds.

Moving on to trustworthiness. Well, I don't know about you, but if more than one News International / News Corp. outlet is involved in phone hacking and bribery, then that looks to me like a pattern of behaviour that calls their trustworthiness into question. We trust journals because we expect journalists to live up to a standard of ethics. We give journalists special legal immunities (such as the protection of sources) precisely because they are supposed to be ethical. We allow the press to be self-regulating, because we want them to act at arm's length from government, and thus we trust them to enforce those ethics.

Individual incidents of unethical behaviour may leave the system ethically intact (assuming that it addresses them and seeks to prevent them in the future). But when there is evidence of a systematic pattern of unethical behaviour, then the system is much more challenged.

And it bears noting that no one has yet suggested that any other news organization was engaged in this kind of behaviour. If the witch hunt is well and truly on, The Guardian, The Independent, The Financial Times and The Daily Express would be subject to no less scrutiny. I am sure that every Parliamentarian in Westminster would dearly love to see Ian Hislop hung out to dry, but so far no one has suggested that Private Eye has been engaged in this type of activity.

As for this being a leftist, partisan witch hunt, that does rather raise the question of why the Prime Minister has weighed in on this, and why the Government referred the BSkyB takeover. Conservatives are out for Murdoch's blood no less than Labour and the LibDems. If you don't understand that, then you do not understand the level of power that Murdoch has held over Whitehall for the last 30-odd years.

As for News International / News Corp. outlets being the only critical voices in Britain, well that's just so laughable it barely merits recognition. Even if you want to restrict yourself to critism from the shallow (oops, right) end of the spectrum, you are still going to have to acknowledge the presence of The Telegraph (a Barclay property).



Can you not see the hypocrisy?? You have been waging a ceaseless campaign to make others consider Fox News is the most trusted news organization--you even named a thread that. So why is it that others have no business trying to alter people's perceptions of Fox News, but you are free so to do? Unless, of course, you're on the payroll. In which case we have a different ethical situation.

Rupert Murdoch isn't extorting money out of people and threatening to send them to jail if they don't pay...unlike the BBC.

Several years ago the BBC did precisely that, threatened to send me to jail for six months because they claimed that I hadn't bought a TV licence when in fact I had. I blackmailed the person who was named on the correspondence and the TV licensing authority paid up. Murdoch/Sky isn't perfect, and I'm not a subscriber, but it provides the only counter viewpoint to the BBC here in England.

I don't know where abouts you are in England but in my part we get news programmes other than BBC and Sky. Personally I find Channel4News the most impartial and informative and Dispatches knocks the socks off Panarama.

High 5 that!!

No, he's saying that there are some things that are incredibly useful and hence incredibly well-paying. If the person who does this sort of thing started out poor, he won't stay that way. His way of referring to them was 'those who take wealth seriously'.


Working class jobs, even decent ones, don't make you rich.


*EDIT*: Removed 2 unkind comments on my part.

Last edited by Ancalagon on 16 Jul 2011, 3:45 am, edited 1 time in total.